BACKGROUND: Aqueous contrast swallow study is recommended as a screening procedure for the evaluation of esophageal anastomotic integrity following esophagectomy. The aim of this study was to assess the accuracy of water-soluble contrast swallow screening as a predictor of clinically significant anastomotic leak in patients with esophagectomy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The records of 505 consecutive patients undergoing esophagectomy in Mayo Clinic from January 1991 through December 1995 were retrospectively reviewed. 464 (92%) patients had water-soluble contrast swallows performed in the early postoperative period (median postoperative day 7, range 4-11 days). RESULTS: A total of 39 radiological leaks were obtained but only 17 of these had clinical signs of anastomotic leakage. Furthermore, 25 patients who had normal swallow study developed a clinical anastomotic leak. There were therefore 22 (4.7%) false positive and 25 (5.4%) false negative results giving values for the specificity, sensitivity and false negative error rate of the radiological examination of 94.7, 40.4, and 59.5% respectively. Aspiration of the contrast agent was noted on fluoroscopy in 30 (6.5%) patients. Only 2 (0.4%) patients developed aqueous contrast agent-caused aspiration pneumonia. There was no procedure-related mortality. CONCLUSION: While radiological assessment of esophageal anastomoses in the early postoperative period using aqueous contrast agents appears to be a relatively safe procedure, the poor sensitivity and high false negative error rate of this technique, when performed on postoperative day 7 and in a series with clinical anastomotic leak rate of 9%, is insufficient for it to be worthwhile as a screening procedure. Copyright (c) 2005 S. Karger AG, Basel.
BACKGROUND: Aqueous contrast swallow study is recommended as a screening procedure for the evaluation of esophageal anastomotic integrity following esophagectomy. The aim of this study was to assess the accuracy of water-soluble contrast swallow screening as a predictor of clinically significant anastomotic leak in patients with esophagectomy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The records of 505 consecutive patients undergoing esophagectomy in Mayo Clinic from January 1991 through December 1995 were retrospectively reviewed. 464 (92%) patients had water-soluble contrast swallows performed in the early postoperative period (median postoperative day 7, range 4-11 days). RESULTS: A total of 39 radiological leaks were obtained but only 17 of these had clinical signs of anastomotic leakage. Furthermore, 25 patients who had normal swallow study developed a clinical anastomotic leak. There were therefore 22 (4.7%) false positive and 25 (5.4%) false negative results giving values for the specificity, sensitivity and false negative error rate of the radiological examination of 94.7, 40.4, and 59.5% respectively. Aspiration of the contrast agent was noted on fluoroscopy in 30 (6.5%) patients. Only 2 (0.4%) patients developed aqueous contrast agent-caused aspiration pneumonia. There was no procedure-related mortality. CONCLUSION: While radiological assessment of esophageal anastomoses in the early postoperative period using aqueous contrast agents appears to be a relatively safe procedure, the poor sensitivity and high false negative error rate of this technique, when performed on postoperative day 7 and in a series with clinical anastomotic leak rate of 9%, is insufficient for it to be worthwhile as a screening procedure. Copyright (c) 2005 S. Karger AG, Basel.
Authors: Joerg Doerfer; Thomas Meyer; Peter Klein; Nathaniel Melling; Alexander G Kerscher; Werner Hohenberger; Joerg Ow Pelz Journal: Patient Saf Surg Date: 2010-11-11
Authors: Sandra C Tomaszek; Stephen D Cassivi; Mark S Allen; K Robert Shen; Francis C Nichols; Claude Deschamps; Dennis A Wigle Journal: Eur J Cardiothorac Surg Date: 2009-11-08 Impact factor: 4.191
Authors: M F McGee; J M Marks; R P Onders; A Chak; J Jin; C P Williams; S J Schomisch; J L Ponsky Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2007-09-03 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Darmarajah Veeramootoo; Rajeev Parameswaran; Rakesh Krishnadas; Peter Froeschle; Martin Cooper; Richard G Berrisford; Shahjehan A Wajed Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2008-12-06 Impact factor: 4.584